lowing
Banned
+1,662|6660|USA

Turquoise wrote:

lowing wrote:

I am focusing too much on money? I see, well then if money is just not so important, then stop endorsing taking it from people that have it. I love how money is not important yet you all seem to know what to do with other peoples, and tell me how unimportant money is so I shouldn't have a problem just giving some more of it away.
I'd bring back the barter system if I could convince more people to support it.  Right now, we have a system based more on bullshit (speculation) than on actual material worth.

lowing wrote:

Education is fine Turquoise, the problem is the lack of moral character, that is prevailing in our country. The problem is, Americans are more and more emulating a sense of entitlement over a sense of responsibility. The problem is, parents are NOT raising their kids properly with respect and true guidance.
...and a large part of that is the result of rampant consumerism in this country.

lowing wrote:

Once again you guys want to blame everyone and everything for personal problems over blaming the individual. Now, people are poor because of bad education systems, it could not be because they simply didn't attend.


You did not address my post in the slightest Turquoise please do so,

I will also ask you to tell me how nessessary a factory worker is without a factory to work in. The rich provide the jobs and pay us to work for them. They assume YOU wanted to work for them since YOU asked them for a job, and was probably excited to beat all hell when you got hired. The truth is you are not that important to a company nor I, if we quit there will always be someone there to take our places. Or have you ever noticed how unemotional a company is compared to an individual when a job is granted, lost, or enhanced?

You think you are important to a company, nope, YOU need them, THEY need anyone.
I'll be honest, lowing.  The people I respect the most live off of the land.  They don't need companies to employ them, and they don't even need to go to the store very often because they can find what they need in nature.   The further we get away from that, the less we value the environment and people in general.

So, in a way, I can agree with you -- just not for the reasons you'd expect.  Maybe we really should move away from tax schemes and even corporate power structures altogether.  If we went back to learning how to live in the wild, we'd be a lot more adaptable.  Don't mistake this as a full rejection of technology -- I would just prefer if we'd be less consumerist and more survivalist.

Admittedly, my own life is a demonstration of what it is to be part of the system.  As you said, my company could easily replace me without a second thought.  But I have to seriously ask myself and everyone else if that's really the life you want to lead.  Maybe I really have chosen the wrong path.  If we submit ourselves as slaves to corporations, we can only expect to remain dependent on people that care very little about our long term needs.  All they really care about is profit.

So, overall, we have developed a system that supports a lifestyle that may be convenient, but is it really healthy?  Look at the direction we're going in with respect to obesity.  Look at how cancer rates have gone up considerably in the last few decades.  Look at how respiratory illnesses like asthma have risen as a direct result of air pollution.   Autistic births have skyrocketed.

So yeah...  maybe I'm choosing the wrong battle here.  I'll tell you what...  Keep your money.  The rich can keep theirs as well.  I should probably care a lot less about what others do with their money and figure out a way to ween myself off of this corrupt system.
Are you saying that consumerism is rampant? Well I will take that as the same as irresponsibile spending (or debting) o nthe part of the individual, which I will also take it as meaning that the people who are so buried and not paying their bills are to blame for this.

You ain't gunna believe this, but I agree with you. We are slaves to the system, none the less, it is how we feed our families like it or not.

Also, if I were in charge, ALL private farmers would live their lives tax free. From property, to income to farm related purchases (which I think they already do) I have no greate respect than for the families that provide food for our citizens.

I would love to live a different lifestyle, but I live with the choices I make. Maybe when Obama is elected, I can find someone to blame then saddle them with my problems.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6660|USA

CameronPoe wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

I think lowing needs to read Das Capital.  Yes lowing, if you read it you will turn into a pinko commie.

It gives insight into the integral worker/capital/commodity relationship that lowing seems to have minimal understanding of.  Maybe after you read that (or at least the cliffs notes on it) I can recommend another book for you.
Even if he read the more 'lowing-palatable' Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith he might begin to post things that show some semblance of an understanding of economics.
To both of you, I know all I need to know, I go to school I make myself marketable, I get a job, I work my up through the ranks of that job, I make more money, I spend more money I save more money, I PAY MY BILLS, and I have a great life style of which me and my family enjoy, with nothing to bitch about except those that feel I need to work for them as well as my family. I am not trying to solve all of the worlds problems here. To be honest ( surprise surpirse) I do not give a fuck about solving all of the worlds problems. If you are Cam, Ken, you are doing a shitty job on that world hunger thing and just about everything else.

So I guess these books are gunna make me "understand" why I need to drag along every leech in society? Because it is "Neighborly" or Nice"? If you wanna be nice or my nieghbor, do me a favor and stop asking me for money.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6414|North Carolina

lowing wrote:

Are you saying that consumerism is rampant? Well I will take that as the same as irresponsibile spending (or debting) o nthe part of the individual, which I will also take it as meaning that the people who are so buried and not paying their bills are to blame for this.
Yes, but the system is also to blame for making it very difficult not to be part of the cycle of debt.  For example, with this recent bailout, we're having to pay for debts that we didn't incur but that corporations did.

lowing wrote:

You ain't gunna believe this, but I agree with you. We are slaves to the system, none the less, it is how we feed our families like it or not.

Also, if I were in charge, ALL private farmers would live their lives tax free. From property, to income to farm related purchases (which I think they already do) I have no greate respect than for the families that provide food for our citizens.

I would love to live a different lifestyle, but I live with the choices I make. Maybe when Obama is elected, I can find someone to blame then saddle them with my problems.
Well, at least we can agree on the slavery part.
IG-Calibre
comhalta
+226|6751|Tír Eoghan, Tuaisceart Éireann
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6564

lowing wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

I think lowing needs to read Das Capital.  Yes lowing, if you read it you will turn into a pinko commie.

It gives insight into the integral worker/capital/commodity relationship that lowing seems to have minimal understanding of.  Maybe after you read that (or at least the cliffs notes on it) I can recommend another book for you.
Even if he read the more 'lowing-palatable' Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith he might begin to post things that show some semblance of an understanding of economics.
To both of you, I know all I need to know, I go to school I make myself marketable, I get a job, I work my up through the ranks of that job, I make more money, I spend more money I save more money, I PAY MY BILLS, and I have a great life style of which me and my family enjoy, with nothing to bitch about except those that feel I need to work for them as well as my family. I am not trying to solve all of the worlds problems here. To be honest ( surprise surpirse) I do not give a fuck about solving all of the worlds problems. If you are Cam, Ken, you are doing a shitty job on that world hunger thing and just about everything else.

So I guess these books are gunna make me "understand" why I need to drag along every leech in society? Because it is "Neighborly" or Nice"? If you wanna be nice or my nieghbor, do me a favor and stop asking me for money.
Our posts had nothing to do with 'solving world hunger'. Perhaps you should read the books and get back to us (I haven't read Das Kapital so I can't speak for it - although I own it and intend to read it). They simply explain the economics of capitalism and how it is of benefit to individuals and to society and demonstrates the mutually beneficial inter-relationships between capital and labour when it works properly. It demonstrates that when those relationships break down it does not and cannot work. Your unflinching belief in 'the system' is naive beyond belief.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-10-26 10:45:22)

Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6610|132 and Bush

Our government creates more problems than it fixes. That is the bottom line.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6564

Kmarion wrote:

Our government creates more problems than it fixes. That is the bottom line.
That and other shady unscrupulous human beings.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6610|132 and Bush

Washington has created a system that practically insist that they do. Mandating poor lending practices while ensuring lenders that they will back bad debts is an example.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6564

Kmarion wrote:

Washington has created a system that practically insist that they do. Mandating poor lending practices while ensuring lenders that they will back bad debts is an example.
Creating financial instruments in which bad debt can be hidden would be an example of what I'm talking about. Bribing politicians with campaign donations would be another.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6610|132 and Bush

Let me share something a friend sent me in my office.
Realtors have always been on the front lines of America's economy.

Our businesses have enjoyed the fruits of past successes but are now faced paying for decisions made by your elected representatives.

The national media has been in hyper drive for the past year repeating over and over certain issues but totally ignoring others.

One issue that has been the catalyst to the housing and mortgage crisis that has negatively affected our business more than 9-11 and has destroyed the lives of countless families goes almost unnoticed. Below is an article I wrote based upon hours of research and can easily verified.

History is too often repeated and change is needed. It is imperative you know who are really  responsible for the crisis we find ourselves in.  With our businesses and the welfare of our families on the line I feel that everyone needs to make informed decisions for our futures, our families futures ands our customers futures. 

Who is REALLY responsible for the Financial Crisis we are paying for?

The real facts surrounding the mortgage crisis. Technology has sealed the words of the real players in time through the archives of the new media. The internet is full of information and facts from senate and congressional hearings as well as interviews. You Tube is loaded with visual recordings of hard-line liberals threatening anyone who would dare expose or stop their efforts to buy the vote of people, especially minorities.


In October 1992, 15 years before the housing meltdown and sub prime crisis, Rep. Jim Leach of Iowa was on the floor of the House, warning of the potential danger that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac posed to the economy. He warned that Fannie and Freddie were changing "from being agencies of the public at large to money machines for the stockholding few."  Rep. Barney Frank in the House and Sen. Chris Dodd in the Senate, Congress openly defied anyone to challenge their assertions that everything was running fine at Fannie and Freddie, they instead doubled Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's risks. The Democrat-led Congress reduced capital limits on the two mortgage lending giants, letting them use enormous leverage to 2.5% of assets at Fannie and Freddie, vs.. 10% for banks to expand lending to low-income, minority communities. Things began OK, there were actually a couple of things that actually helped the minorities on being requiring validation for lenders rejections. The revisions also brought out greater RESPA oversight of such crimes against society as title companies paying for Realtor open houses and giving gifts of appreciation to anyone in real estate.

Way back in April 2001 the administration's budget stated that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large government-sponsored enterprise GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity."

In May of 2002 the President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

In February 2003  the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) released a report explaining that "although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of government-sponsored enterprise, GSE obligations, In September of the same year Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO's review found earnings manipulations. In October Fannie Mae disclosed a $1.2 billion accounting error.

In 2004 President Bush's annual Budget again highlighted the risk posed by the explosive growth of the government-sponsored enterprises and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator:  "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSE slack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." a new first class regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs:  Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System."  (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)  (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)

In April 2005 Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform indicating the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system."  (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)

May 25, 2006, on behalf of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 (via Beltway Snark)  John McCain  predicted the collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, along with Bear Stearns and AIG.  He criticized the falsification of financial records to benefit executives, including Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson, both of whom work as advisers for the Obama campaign! McCain also noted the power of the  Democrats lobbying efforts to prevent ANY oversight of their business practices.

July 2007, Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse. President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options."  (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)

December 2007, President Bush AGAIN warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. He called on Congress to pass legislation that would strengthen independent regulation of government-sponsored enterprises.  The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year was a start.  But the liberal led Senate never acted.  (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07)

February 2008,  Assistant Secretary David Nason again reiterates the desperate need to reform saying "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully."  (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)

March 2008,  The President called on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. You  need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages."  (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)

April 2008,  The President urged Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Congress must do what will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes."  (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)

May 2008,  President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.  "Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes."  Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation  He repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans."   (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08) "[T]he government ought to be helping credit-worthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that. Reform will come with a strong, independent regulator."  (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)" Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub prime loans."  (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)

June 2008, As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."  (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)

Finally in July 2008 President Bush publicly called for GSE  (government-sponsored enterprise) reform 17 times before Congress acted!  Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the liberal legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.

Finally after 17 separate efforts to correct the grave errors of the financial markets Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing. TOO LITTLE TOO LATE!!!!!!
While all this was going on, the head of the Senate Over site Committee was the largest recipient of campaign funds and a  junior congressman from Illinois was the second largest recipient of campaign funds from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
The saddest reality is that so many people bought into the scam and now millions of American families are facing the loss of their homes, their cars, their American dream all because of a lack of true understanding of capitalist market driven society. The end result is that there is a massive wedge of distrust between races and economic classes. And the very people who were suppose to have been helped are now suffering the most from these reckless manipulations to the housing and financial industries.
One last little ditty,  certain Hedge fund investors are making BILLIONS from YOUR LOSSES AND SUFFERING!!
In spite of the main stream media's attempt to hide the facts from you need to know the truth.  May God be merciful upon us and give us what we need instead of what we deserve.

I have sent this e-mail as just a fellow Realtor and not as a representative to anyone PERIOD! I care about you and your businesses and I am sick about what is being held back from us. If these truths have offended anyone, I apologize. Jeff
... an example of what I'm talking about.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
GorillaTicTacs
Member
+231|6382|Kyiv, Ukraine

Kmarion wrote:

Let me share something a friend sent me in my office.

... an example of what I'm talking about.
And a prime example of partisan bullshit.  To address each point would take more time than I have, but lets just say that they ignored quite a few facts.  I will point out the general principle.

Do you have any idea how many good honest non-partisan bureacrats have been sacked under the W. administration through reforms that did make it through?  How many were replaced by underqualified and incompetent right-wing political hacks in almost every department of our government all the way down to the local level?  It can't even be counted.  Do you know how many reform bills stating one agenda had the exact opposite effect (Clear Skies Act anyone?)?  Do you know how many GAO rules were changed or ignored under W.?  It would blow your mind.

Basic procedure -
1 - Pass new law or change rules or open another department.
2 - Stack target department with incompetent or corrupt hacks.
3 - Watch the taxpayer dollars flow to your homies.
4 - Prepare for cozy retirement in Dubai or South America somewhere.
5 - Mission accomplished.

There is not a single government institution that W. got near that didn't suffer the above procedure in some way.  Not one.  By example, Enron was a dry run in a state-level market.  Bush took the procedure national.  Obama has a shitload of work ahead of him, but methinks he's well aware of this.
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6564

Kmarion wrote:

... an example of what I'm talking about.
Interesting but it seems to be partly an anti-liberal diatribe. Let's not forget the Republicans had full unfettered control of government for some 6 years. What baffles me, and it happens here in Ireland too, is that our governments can lend money to people to buy homes. I just find that idea completely abhorrent and contrary to common sense.

Let's not forget McCain himself accepting millions in donations from the same Wall Street bankers accused of being partly responsible for this shitheap.

"In turn, the Democrat pointed out that Charlie Black and Rick Davis, two of Mr McCain's most senior advisers, were once lobbyists who fought to prevent regulation of Fannie Mae and its cousin, Freddie Mac. Eight McCain advisers and fundraisers are executives and lobbyists at AIG, the US insurance giant also bailed out by government. Mr McCain's economic guru Phil Gramm, and Mr Obama's advisers Robert Rubin and Lawrence Summers, all pushed through deregulation of the financial sector in 1999, a move blamed for today's problems."

Nobody's hands are clean.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-10-26 12:16:10)

Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6610|132 and Bush

They did not have unfettered control.

Kmarion wrote:

I've answered this before. But since you seem to have a genuine interest I don't mind. A simple majority is not enough to constitute full control. Neither party has the 60 votes required to break a filibuster. A minority party can block a measure until either the measure is withdrawn or the filibuster is broken by 60 votes. This Act did not officially die until 2007.

Kmarion wrote:

Jesus .. how many times do I have to explain this?  The Bill didn't officially die until 2007. The Dems kept it hung up in the committee using what is called a filibuster. The republicans didn't have everyone on board, but they did have most. You need 60 votes to break a filibuster, and neither party had it. Learn about how government works before you start telling us why it isn't working.

http://bensguide.gpo.gov/
The Dems might get their Super Majority soon though.

You are right though. Nobody's hands are clean. The GOP has got the stamp of deregulation all over them (excluding my examples). They have also helped to encourage exploiting the system.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6564

Kmarion wrote:

The Dems might get their Super Majority soon though.

You are right though. Nobody's hands are clean. The GOP has got the stamp of deregulation all over them (excluding my examples). They have also helped to encourage exploiting the system.
Well that filibuster thing seems absolutely retarded and undemocratic. How on fucking earth did that ever become part of the US political system? I take it they were never forced into using the filibuster on this though, or am I wrong? The Reps could easily have exposed the Dems for what they were if they had demonstrated the Dems using a filibuster on something that ultimately turned out to be necessary. Like waving the 'you voted for the Iraq war' card in someone's face.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6610|132 and Bush

GorillaTicTacs wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Let me share something a friend sent me in my office.

... an example of what I'm talking about.
And a prime example of partisan bullshit.  To address each point would take more time than I have, but lets just say that they ignored quite a few facts.  I will point out the general principle.

Do you have any idea how many good honest non-partisan bureacrats have been sacked under the W. administration through reforms that did make it through?  How many were replaced by underqualified and incompetent right-wing political hacks in almost every department of our government all the way down to the local level?  It can't even be counted.  Do you know how many reform bills stating one agenda had the exact opposite effect (Clear Skies Act anyone?)?  Do you know how many GAO rules were changed or ignored under W.?  It would blow your mind.

Basic procedure -
1 - Pass new law or change rules or open another department.
2 - Stack target department with incompetent or corrupt hacks.
3 - Watch the taxpayer dollars flow to your homies.
4 - Prepare for cozy retirement in Dubai or South America somewhere.
5 - Mission accomplished.

There is not a single government institution that W. got near that didn't suffer the above procedure in some way.  Not one.  By example, Enron was a dry run in a state-level market.  Bush took the procedure national.  Obama has a shitload of work ahead of him, but methinks he's well aware of this.
It's not bullshit. It's documented fact. Obama does have a lot of work ahead of him. Kinda like Bush did when dealing with corporate scandals (World Com, Tyco, Enron), homeland attacks, two wars, the countries most costliest natural disaster, lending melt down, housing crisis.. Hopefully the Junior senator can manage.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6414|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

Our government creates more problems than it fixes. That is the bottom line.
...which is why much of the world fears and hates us.
PureFodder
Member
+225|6294

Kmarion wrote:

Our government creates more problems than it fixes. That is the bottom line.
The one group that does more to influence government policy than any other is the business community and corporations.

"The government is the shadow cast by business over society."  -  John Dewey
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6660|USA

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:


Even if he read the more 'lowing-palatable' Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith he might begin to post things that show some semblance of an understanding of economics.
To both of you, I know all I need to know, I go to school I make myself marketable, I get a job, I work my up through the ranks of that job, I make more money, I spend more money I save more money, I PAY MY BILLS, and I have a great life style of which me and my family enjoy, with nothing to bitch about except those that feel I need to work for them as well as my family. I am not trying to solve all of the worlds problems here. To be honest ( surprise surpirse) I do not give a fuck about solving all of the worlds problems. If you are Cam, Ken, you are doing a shitty job on that world hunger thing and just about everything else.

So I guess these books are gunna make me "understand" why I need to drag along every leech in society? Because it is "Neighborly" or Nice"? If you wanna be nice or my nieghbor, do me a favor and stop asking me for money.
Our posts had nothing to do with 'solving world hunger'. Perhaps you should read the books and get back to us (I haven't read Das Kapital so I can't speak for it - although I own it and intend to read it). They simply explain the economics of capitalism and how it is of benefit to individuals and to society and demonstrates the mutually beneficial inter-relationships between capital and labour when it works properly. It demonstrates that when those relationships break down it does not and cannot work. Your unflinching belief in 'the system' is naive beyond belief.
No Cam, we are talking about 2 different things here, I am talking about the INDIVIDUAL and his responsibilities to himself and/or his family. YOU are talking about it on a global scale. I can not think that big, nor do I give a fuck, my posts are grounded to not what I can do for the world, or the reasons why Obama wants to go Communist, but what I can do for my family. Fuck world economics, Obamas solutions makes the US a socialist state and I am against it, I do not give a shit how it affects you.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6115|eXtreme to the maX

Lowing wrote:

I can not think that big, nor do I give a fuck
LOL

Lowing wrote:

my posts are grounded to not what I can do for the world,.. , but what I can do for my family.
LOLOL

Lowing wrote:

or the reasons why Obama wants to go Communist
He doesn't want to 'go communist', he's a centrist Democrat.

Lowing wrote:

Fuck world economics,..., I do not give a shit how it affects you.
LOLOLOLOLOL

Wow, a Republican speaks his mind, maybe my tongue in cheek post was not so wide of the mark.
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=112347
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
GorillaTicTacs
Member
+231|6382|Kyiv, Ukraine

Lowing wrote:

I can not think that big, nor do I give a fuck
That, in a nutshell, is how conservatives are made of epic fail.

To dissect - "I have a small mind and I don't care about anything outside my immediate surroundings."

Its a message that's just beautiful in its simplicity.  I wish my game designers could do that with their high concept documentation, I'd have a very easy job then.
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6564

lowing wrote:

No Cam, we are talking about 2 different things here, I am talking about the INDIVIDUAL and his responsibilities to himself and/or his family. YOU are talking about it on a global scale. I can not think that big, nor do I give a fuck, my posts are grounded to not what I can do for the world, or the reasons why Obama wants to go Communist, but what I can do for my family. Fuck world economics, Obamas solutions makes the US a socialist state and I am against it, I do not give a shit how it affects you.
Is there any real point talking to someone who holds the preposterously ludicrous opinion that Obama 'wants to go Communist'? It's difficult to comprehend such idiocy.
GorillaTicTacs
Member
+231|6382|Kyiv, Ukraine

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

No Cam, we are talking about 2 different things here, I am talking about the INDIVIDUAL and his responsibilities to himself and/or his family. YOU are talking about it on a global scale. I can not think that big, nor do I give a fuck, my posts are grounded to not what I can do for the world, or the reasons why Obama wants to go Communist, but what I can do for my family. Fuck world economics, Obamas solutions makes the US a socialist state and I am against it, I do not give a shit how it affects you.
Is there any real point talking to someone who holds the preposterously ludicrous opinion that Obama 'wants to go Communist'? It's difficult to comprehend such idiocy.
Dude, its lowing, you know this already.  Since when did you ever have an actual intellectual discussion with reasoned responses on this board anyways?  I keep fishing for a challenge and it hasn't happened yet, though admittedly FEOS and Kmarion do make me dig a bit sometimes when they post the latest chainmails and it hasn't been debunked by snopes yet. 

The saddest part is that there is actually a huge body of intellectual conservative work out there that can make you think hard and sometimes even shift your position a bit (reading Terror and Consent at the moment).  Unfortunately, it almost never makes it through the filter.

Last edited by GorillaTicTacs (2008-10-27 05:54:40)

unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6781|PNW

Lowing wrote:

Fuck world economics,..., I do not give a shit how it affects you.
...DER.

Go read a bit about the Great Depression.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6660|USA

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Our government creates more problems than it fixes. That is the bottom line.
...which is why much of the world fears and hates us.
........and yet everyone on here thinks what we need is MORE govt. in our lives with MORE govt. programs taking over for private enterprise.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6660|USA

Dilbert_X wrote:

Lowing wrote:

I can not think that big, nor do I give a fuck
LOL

Lowing wrote:

my posts are grounded to not what I can do for the world,.. , but what I can do for my family.
LOLOL

Lowing wrote:

or the reasons why Obama wants to go Communist
He doesn't want to 'go communist', he's a centrist Democrat.

Lowing wrote:

Fuck world economics,..., I do not give a shit how it affects you.
LOLOLOLOLOL

Wow, a Republican speaks his mind, maybe my tongue in cheek post was not so wide of the mark.
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=112347
maybe you could tqake the whole post in the context as it was meant, instead of piece mealing it so you ca nhave it say whay you WANT it to say. Nehhhhh I doubt it.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard